Vicarious infringement Supreme Court wants US input on whether ISPs should be liable for users piracy SCOTUS asks US government for its view on $1 billion Sony v. Cox case. Jon Brodkin Nov 25, 2024 4:15 pm | 57 Credit: Getty Images | OcusFocus Credit: Getty Images | OcusFocus Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreThe Supreme Court signaled it may take up a case that could determine whether Internet service providers must terminate users who are accused of copyright infringement. In an order issued today, the court invited the Department of Justice's solicitor general to file a brief "expressing the views of the United States."In Sony Music Entertainment v. Cox Communications, the major record labels argue that cable provider Cox should be held liable for failing to terminate users who were repeatedly flagged for infringement based on their IP addresses being connected to torrent downloads. There was a mixed ruling at the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit as the appeals court affirmed a jury's finding that Cox was guilty of willful contributory infringement but reversed a verdict on vicarious infringement "because Cox did not profit from its subscribers' acts of infringement."That ruling vacated a $1 billion damages award and ordered a new damages trial. Cox and Sony are both seeking a Supreme Court review. Cox wants to overturn the finding of willful contributory infringement, while Sony wants to reinstate the $1 billion verdict.The Supreme Court asking for US input on Sony v. Coxcould be a precursor to the high court taking up the case. For example, the court last year asked the solicitor general to weigh in on Texas and Florida laws that restricted how social media companies can moderate their platforms. The court subsequently took up the case and vacated lower-court rulings, making it clear that content moderation is protected by the First Amendment.Record labels vs. ISPsCox has said that letting the piracy ruling stand "would force ISPs to terminate Internet service to households or businesses based on unproven allegations of infringing activity, and put them in a position of having to police their networks." Cox said that ISPs "have no way of verifying whether a bot-generated notice is accurate" and that even if the notices are accurate, terminating an account would punish every user in a household where only one person may have illegally downloaded copyrighted files.Record labels urged the court to reinstate the vicarious infringement verdict. "As the District Court explained, the jury had ample evidence that Cox profited from its subscribers' infringement, including evidence 'that when deciding whether to terminate a subscriber for repeat infringement, Cox considered the subscriber's monthly payments,' and 'Cox repeatedly declined to terminate infringing subscribers' Internet service in order to continue collecting their monthly fees,'" the record labels' petition said.Another potentially important copyright case involves the record labels and Grande, an ISP owned by Astound Broadband. The conservative-leaning US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled last month that Grande violated the law by failing to terminate subscribers accused of being repeat infringers. The 5th Circuit also ordered a new trial on damages because it said a $46.8 million award was too high. Grande and the record labels are both seeking en banc rehearings of the 5th Circuit panel ruling.Jon BrodkinSenior IT ReporterJon BrodkinSenior IT Reporter Jon is a Senior IT Reporter for Ars Technica. He covers the telecom industry, Federal Communications Commission rulemakings, broadband consumer affairs, court cases, and government regulation of the tech industry. 57 Comments

Max Belov, Chief Technology Officer, Coherent SolutionsNovember 25, 20244 Min ReadMopic via Alamy StockEvery breakthrough has its share of mistakes. Artificial intelligence is disrupting routine tasks and is quickly establishing itself as a very powerful personal assistant. For example, AI helps medical researchers find and evaluate available donors for cell treatments, giving patients hope where there was none -- and the list of AI uses goes on. Yet, this same technology generates misleading financial forecasts based on non-existent data or creates references to fictitious scientific articles.AI models are only as trustworthy as the data they are trained on. However, even with a solid data foundation, the results of AI predictions are not 100% accurate. The impact of their occasional hallucinations may range from causing slight user embarrassment to billions of dollars worth of financial losses and legal repercussions for organizations. The question is how organizations can look beyond hallucinations and rely on AI in decision-making when the models are partially transparent.AI Confidence Mislead Decision-MakersOver half of Fortune 500 companies note AI as a potential risk factor. They fear AI inconsistencies and potential ethical risks that might lead to negative brand publicity and financial and reputational losses.It is impossible to fix AI hallucinations with a wave of a hand. So far, hallucinations are a common challenge in AI solutions. While the explainability of traditional ML methods and neural networks is well understood by now, many researchers are working on methods to explain GenAI and LLMs. Significant advancements will come in the near future. Meanwhile, AI certainly shouldnt be dismissed because it's not entirely reliable: It has already become a must-have tool for organizations across various industries. Decision-makers should rely on human intelligence and supervision to effectively integrate AI models into business processes.Related:Black Box Trust IssuesAI models are black boxes that lack transparency and are only partially explainable. Hallucinations are common in complex language models and deep learning systems. Such systems are affected since they hinge on patterns derived from vast datasets rather than on a fundamental deterministic understanding of the content.The good news is that taking an insightful look into the black boxes is possible, to a certain extent. Organizations can use specific methods to address one of the major trust issues with AI.Explaining the UnexplainableIn many business applications, especially those influencing critical decision-making, the ability to explain how an AI model reaches its conclusions is more important than achieving the highest possible models accuracy.Related:Not all AI models are black boxes. For example, decision trees or linear regressions are common in predictive analytics, financial forecasting, and business intelligence applications. These types of AI models are interpretable.For non-transparent models, SHAP (shapley additive explanations) helps explain how much each input affects an LLMs prediction. For example, users can ask an LLM to highlight key points in the input data and explain the logical chain behind the output. The answers can help improve system prompts and input data. However, SHAP has limited effectiveness for pre-trained LLMs due to their complexity, which requires different methods to explain their results. This is still a very rapidly developing field, with new emerging approaches for the interpretability of LLMs, such as using attention mechanisms to trace back how a model reaches its conclusion or using LLMs with memory functions to reduce inconsistencies over time.How Can Organizations Rely on AI Models?Organizations should carefully manage and contextualize the reliability of the models they use. Decision-makers can apply guardrails like regular audits and protocols for human oversight. They can consider creating a domain-specific knowledge base, which, for example, will be paramount for medical professionals, as their decisions often impact people's lives. They can also apply theRAGapproach (retrieval augmented generation) to mitigate associated risks. For example, a customer support chatbot can retrieve past interactions with a client, augment that data with product updates, and generate highly relevant responses to resolve a query.Related:Generative AI works best by augmenting human decision-making rather than entirely replacing it. It is important to keep humans in the loop, as they are competent to monitor a models accuracy and ethical compliance. As a rule of thumb, implement GenAI solutions that provide insights while putting human employees in charge of making the final decisions. They can correct and refine the outputs before an AI-driven error grows into a problem.AI models should be dynamic. Feedback loops where humans report issues and introduce changes play a key role in maintaining and enhancing the accuracy and reliability of AI. The next step in aligning AI with organizational processes is in fostering collaboration between data scientists, domain experts, and leaders.Lastly, before investing in GenAI, organizations should conduct a maturity assessment to make sure they have the necessary data infrastructure and robust governance policies in place. They need these to enhance the quality and accessibility of data used to train AI models.AI has great potential to enhance decision-making, but organizations must acknowledge the risks of hallucinations. When they implement consistent measures addressing this issue, they build trust in AI and maximize the benefits of AI solutions.About the AuthorMax BelovChief Technology Officer, Coherent SolutionsMax Belov joined Coherent Solutions in 1998 and assumed the role of CTO two years later. He is a seasoned software architect with deep expertise in designing and implementing distributed systems, cybersecurity, cloud technology, and AI. He also leads Coherents R&D Lab, focusing on IoT, blockchain, and AI innovations. His commentary and bylines appeared in CIO, Silicon UK Tech News, Business Reporter, and TechRadar Pro.See more from Max BelovNever Miss a Beat: Get a snapshot of the issues affecting the IT industry straight to your inbox.SIGN-UPYou May Also LikeReportsMore Reports

Plastic waste in IndonesiaPA Images / AlamyThe world currently produces more than 50 million tonnes of mismanaged plastic waste each year, and some researchers project this flood of plastic pollution will double by mid-century but they also say that, if countries can agree to adopt four key policies during global plastic treaty negotiations this week, we could slash that number by 90 per cent.Plastic pollution ends up clogging ecosystems on land and at sea. This has an impact on every level of the food chain, from phytoplankton cells to humans, says Sarah-Jeanne Royer at the University of California, San Diego. Plastics are also responsible for about 5 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions.Thats why most of the worlds countries are meeting in Busan, South Korea this week to hammer out the final details of a global treaty aimed at ending plastic pollution. In 2022, 175 countries already agreed to adopt the legally binding treaty and have spent the past two years debating exactly what it should require, with particular disagreements over setting limits on the production of new plastic.AdvertisementTo bring more clarity to the debate, Douglas McCauley at the University of California, Santa Barbara and his colleagues used an artificial intelligence model trained on economic data to test how the policies under consideration would affect global plastic pollution. I wasnt convinced that [eliminating plastic pollution] was actually possible, says McCauley. But it turns out you can get pretty darn close.According to their projections, under current conditions, plastic pollution is set to roughly double to between 100 and 139 million tonnes by 2050. But a combination of four policies, all of which are still on the table in the current treaty draft, were enough to reduce this by more than 90 per cent. Get a dose of climate optimism delivered straight to your inbox every month.Sign up to newsletterThe most impactful of these was a mandate that plastic products contain at least 40 per cent recycled material. That rule alone cut plastic pollution in half by mid-century. This effect is so significant because it cuts demand for newly made or virgin plastic while also spurring demand for recycled materials, says McCauley. Suddenly theres a giant global market for recycling.But recycling on its own wasnt sufficient. If your target is to end plastic pollution, you need to do things across the entire lifecycle, he says. Deeper cuts required limiting production of virgin plastics to 2020 levels. This production cap cut plastic pollution by around 60 million tonnes per year by the middle of the century, according to the model. This change also had the greatest impact on greenhouse gas emissions from plastic production, as extracting fossil fuels and turning them into virgin plastics involves emissions-intensive processes.A third policy, spending $50 billion on waste management, reduced pollution by nearly the same amount as the production cap especially if these funds were spent in low-income countries with poor infrastructure, which are also the most inundated by plastic pollution. When you start talking about global finance, [the amount of money needed] is not that big, says McCauley. Building a sanitary landfill is not like building a port.Plastic waste is increasing, and though some is recycled or destroyed, a large portion is mismanaged and piles up as plastic pollutionA. Samuel Pottinger et al.Finally, a small tax on plastic packaging cut pollution by tens of millions of tonnes. The researchers based this estimate on case studies of how people reduced their plastic use in response to similar taxes, such as a 5 cent fee on single-use plastic bags in Washington DC. Money raised by such a tax could also be used to pay for other changes, like building out waste management infrastructure or improving recycling systems.Royer, who was not involved with the study, says she thinks those policies would all help. Reducing the use of single-use plastic such as grocery bags or plastic forks via a tax or a ban could also make a difference, she says. If we look at plastic pollution in general, 40 per cent of the plastic being produced is single-use items.However, she points out local rules alone will never solve the problem. For instance, California banned some single-use plastic bags a decade ago and this year banned all such bags. But most of the plastic pollution that washes up on its beaches originates outside the state: Californias plastic waste generally drifts across the Pacific from Asia or is flotsam left by the fishing industry. Theres no border, says Royer.Thats where a global treaty comes in. The researchers showed how implementing different policies across the world would cut down on three things: the volume of mismanaged plastic waste, the production of new plastics, and plastic-related greenhouse gas emissions. The four key policies in combination, seen in the graph below, reduced all three measures, and in particular slashed mismanaged waste by 91 per cent.Researchers estimated the impact of different policies for reducing plastic wasteA. Samuel Pottinger et al.In Busan, countries have now reached the deadline to decide on a final treaty draft, but they remain far apart on key issues. A main fault line is whether the treaty should include a production cap on newly made plastics, which the researchers found was the second-most impactful policy. Plastic-producing countries and the petrochemical industry oppose production caps, instead throwing their support behind recycling measures.A high-ambition coalition of 68 countries, including the UK, is pushing for a treaty that would include both, with the goal of eliminating plastic pollution by 2040. Other researchers have also argued a cap on plastic production is necessary to end pollution. But just last week, advocates for a production cap were dismayed by reports the US would not support a specific limit on plastic production. McCauley recently penned an open letter signed by more than one hundred researchers to the Biden administration urging it to support a strong plastic treaty.Were at a pivotal moment, said Erin Simon at the World Wildlife Foundation, an environmental advocacy group, in an email to press. Our last best chance to forge an agreement that could end the flow of plastic into nature is within reach, but only if countries come to the negotiating table with a clear vision and determination to get the job done.Journal referenceScience DOI: 10.1126/science.adr3837Topics:

The H5N1 bird flu virus has caused sporadic cases in humansLuca Bruno/Associated Press/AlamyIf the H5N1 bird flu virus sparks a pandemic, older people may have better immunity than younger people because of past exposure to closely related viruses.In previous clusters of H5N1 cases, older people were less likely to catch the virus than younger individuals, so scientists hypothesised that the former group may have stronger immunity against the virus than those who are younger. This could be because older people have had more exposure to flu strains that are closely related to H5N1, called H1N1 and H2N2.

My mom had me nine months after my grandmother died I was a sorrow baby. She was 42 and my siblings were all teenagers by the time I was born. Now I'm in my 40s and losing my mom to dementia and I get why she had me. My mother's own mother had died nine months earlier and, in an attempt to feel something other than her intense grief, my mother accidentally got pregnant with me. Now I was on deck to enter the world and heal her broken heart. No pressure.It was mid July and the city of New York was aching for a thunderstorm. My mother told me she sat outside, hot, sticky, and eight months pregnant. She had a nip of cold beer in one hand and a salty pretzel rod in the other. She was 42 years old.She called me her 'sorrow baby'My parents already had four teenage children when they found out I would be making my big debut. Reactions ranged from horrified teen disgust at the thought of sexually active parents, to nervous tears and indignation, to the pumped up excitement of one of my brothers who ironically would end up sharing a birthday with me, just 17 years apart.The transition from her mother's death to my life was nearly instantaneous as if my grandmother and I could have high-fived each other as we passed through the veil. I was due on my grandmother's birthday, but was born a week late. Regardless, my mom forever linked us together, like there was some invisible soul thread we shared. True or not, my mom always made that connection. The circumstances of my conception also led my maudlin Irish mother to affectionately refer to me as her "sorrow baby" because out of that deep sorrow somehow came joy.A whole family existed before I joined itI grew up in a house with six full grown adults. It's like a complete and total family existed before I hit the scene. This of course technically made me "the baby" of the family on paper, but if you took a closer look, "precocious only child" was a more apt representation. My siblings and I were very close, but we did not have what you'd call a traditional sibling dynamic. I figured out how to entertain myself (and everyone else in the room). I realized quickly that when I made adults laugh, I got to be part of the crew. I gained a wild perspective on how to read people and keep them happy which some might call empathy, but I'm pretty sure was my survival mechanism. I got my parents to myself for the most part; which my siblings never let me forget. They'd teasingly call me the "rich kid" and in a way, I was. My parents had disposable income and more time to spend with me. I'd go on their middle-aged dates with them; leaf-peeping Sunday drives in the Catskills, bandshell concerts to see ultra hip Barbershop Quartets, watching "Murder, She Wrote" in earnest I was a little old soul in OshKosh-B'gosh overalls.She said I kept her youngThe best times were when mom and I were home alone. She'd put on her old records and we'd sing and dance around the table listening to Elvis, Johnny Cash, and The Clancy Brothers. "You keep me young," she would say with her easy smile.We'd get ice cream at Barbara's Candy World and she'd tease me because she knew I'd order the same thing, Vanilla with rainbow sprinkles. Mom would get a Rocky Road that somehow always ended up all over her and we'd crack up laughing in the same big cackle.Now I'm the same age my mother was when she had me and while my mom is still alive, we are losing her to dementia. I have never experienced a pain so cruel. I was always acutely aware of the fact my mom was older than everyone else's (I was so excited in 2nd grade when she'd won a contest, "oldest mom in the class!"). In that way, I knew I'd lose my mom earlier than my friends would lose theirs, but I thought for this reason, I'd be prepared. Ever the perfectionist, I thought I could get a headstart on grieving by recognizing its inevitability, but I realize now there is nothing that can prepare you for this kind of loss.The idea of a "sorrow baby" is starting to make a lot of sense, in some iteration anyway; a puppy, a screenplay, a thousand homemade cakes, whatever. I don't know what it's like to have a child, but I do know I am feeling that same grief in losing the mother I knew. I understand these feelings need to go somewhere. I realize it's not so much that you need that baby to fill you, but that you have so much love you still need to give.

Koyaana Redstar, a vintage luxury handbag expert, swears by resale handbags.She said she bought a Chanel Boy bag for $2050 in 2015 and sold it for $2000 in 2024.Taking good care of a bag is essential in making sure it retains its value, she said.This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Koyaana Redstar, the head of luxury buying at Luxe Du Jour, an online luxury boutique for vintage designer handbags. It has been edited for length and clarity.I've worked for Rebag, The RealReal, and other vintage consignment stores, and I have 20 years of experience in the resale industry.I swear by resale, just because your return on investment is always going to be higher if you buy resale and sell resale, versus buying at retail price and then selling it off.Here's a fun bit of girl math. In 2015, I bought a new medium, studded Chanel Boy bag. In the years I owned it, I wore it at least six times a month and that's a conservative estimate. I paid $2,050 for it in 2015 at Rebag, a luxury resale company.I loved that bag and took good care of it, but I sold it this year for $2,000 to supplement the funds I needed for my wedding. A black leather Chanel Boy handbag. Edward Berthelot/Getty Images All in, you could say I basically paid $50 to own it for eight years.To me, buying this bag was a hundred percent worth it and a great deal.How to take care of luxury bags An employee repairing an old Louis Vuitton bag in Paris, France. MIGUEL MEDINA/AFP via Getty Images Preserving a bag's condition and caring for it is what helps it retain its value.My biggest tip is to always store the handbag in climate-controlled environments that are not too cold and have moderate humidity.Always remember that most pieces are made of leather, which is really just skin. Heat and humidity make it wither. You also don't want the bag to be too wet because mold could grow.Just make sure you clean the piece with a leather moisturizer or just a fabric cleaner.But don't buy designer handbags just to resell them Luxury handbags from Bottega Veneta and Hermes. Jeremy Moeller/Getty Images My advice, however, is not to buy bags just to sell them. I give that same advice to consigners who come to me after shopping at Herms or Chanel and want to sell their bags.When we quote them prices below retail, they say that they want to make what they paid for it.The truth is, reselling bags also takes into consideration the demand for an item. I can't guarantee that I'll be able to help customers make a profit.So, I always tell people, "Buy something you like, for you. Don't do it to resell it."At the end of the day, investing in a bag you don't like is a gamble. You want to build up a collection because you like the pieces because they speak to you, and because they complement your personal style.

The COP29 conference the latest round of international climate change talks, held this year in Baku, Azerbaijan pushed past its Friday deadline and ended over the weekend with a new commitment to raise $300 billion a year by 2035 to help developing countries cope with the effects of warming and transition to cleaner energy. In a year of geopolitical fragmentation, people doubted that Azerbaijan could deliver. They doubted that everyone could agree, said COP29 President Mukhtar Babayev during the conference. They were wrong on both counts.Yet despite the host countrys optimistic read on the summits conclusion, many delegates and activists were furious with what they saw as a meager investment. Yes, the new commitment is triple the current climate finance agreement of $100 billion per year. But wealthy countries were already two years behind in meeting that original goal, and the new target is still far short of the firm $1.3 trillion that developing countries have campaigned for years to secure. It is sad that after months of negotiations, they have waited till the last official day of COP to table a dismal figure, leaving no sufficient time for deliberations amongst parties, and to make it worse, the figure is shockingly too low, said Rohey John Manjang, environment minister for the West African nation Gambia, in a statement.The negotiations also once again failed to reach an accord on reducing consumption of fossil fuels that are contributing to the warming of the planet. The climate talks echoed the COP28 meeting last year in the United Arab Emirates in that they were again held in a country whose economy depends on oil. Azerbaijan gets two-thirds of its revenue from oil and gas production, and a COP host was once again accused of using the proceedings to forge fossil fuel export deals. COP29 was also one of the most well-attended climate meetings, with 66,000 registrants, though its down from the record 80,000 attendees at last years talks. Like 2023, this years negotiations concluded near the end of whats likely to be the hottest year on record. COP29 faced additional complications. After a plateau and hopes of a decline, global greenhouse gas emissions are rising again and are likely to continue climbing. To meet the target of the Paris climate agreement to limit warming this century to less than 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) above pre-Industrial levels, humanity would have to cut emissions by more than half by 2030. According to a survey of scientists who contributed to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, most now think this goal is out of reach. With the US presidential election of Donald Trump, the worlds second-largest greenhouse gas emitter is also likely to back out of the Paris agreement altogether. Trump would be fulfilling a campaign promise after President Joe Biden brought the US back, following Trumps withdrawal during his first term. Trump also wants to expand fossil fuel production and may cut incentives for clean technologies like electric vehicles.Behind all this, the urgency to address climate change has only grown. 2024 has been a year of major disasters like heat waves, hurricanes, coral bleaching, flooding, and wildfires, events whose raw ingredients are poised to become more powerful in a warming world. These disasters are already having major economic effects. And further changes to the climate are likely to have some of their most acute effects rising sea levels, more extreme rainfall, extraordinary heat waves on the countries that contributed least to the problem. But as the US steps back, other countries like China are preparing to step up. A smaller role for the US, and a bigger part for ChinaThe COP29 conference began after the US election, so the US negotiators were still part of Bidens team, and they worked to nail down as much as they could before he leaves office in January. They highlighted how the US has made the single-largest clean energy investment in the world through the Inflation Reduction Act. US negotiators noted that the US is contributing $11 billion to the pool of international climate financing, exceeding its share of the promised $100 billion pool funded by wealthy countries. The US also emphasized its goal of tripling its nuclear energy compared to 2020 levels by 2050 and made progress in ratcheting down emissions of methane, a greenhouse gas thats about 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide when it comes to trapping heat in the atmosphere. Biden himself, though, didnt attend the talks. He was instead at the G20 summit in Brazil, where he visited the Amazon rainforest and pledged an additional $50 million to protect it.Biden acknowledged that his successor wants to undo many of his climate initiatives, but noted in a statement that many cities and states will pick up the mantle on climate change, and many aspects of the transition to cleaner energy sources are unstoppable. Solar energys growth continues to defy forecasts, wind energy is competitive with fossil fuels in some markets, and EVs are getting more popular around the world. While some may seek to deny or delay the clean energy revolution thats underway in America and around the world, nobody can reverse it nobody, Biden said. Yet under Biden, the US has also reached record high levels of oil and gas production and maintained tariffs on Chinese clean energy products like solar panels and electric vehicles. Even with the pause on new liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, the US is on track to double LNG exports by 2030. Trump wants to impose even more tariffs on China, which would further raise the prices of imported EVs and make many of the essential components of clean energy systems, like batteries and steel, more expensive. But as the US steps back from the international stage on climate change, China is gearing up to fill the void, emphasizing a willingness to work with other countries. China sent nearly 1,000 delegates to COP29. It already reigns supreme in solar energy, wind power, batteries, and electric vehicles, both for its domestic consumption and for exports, and its hungry for new customers.China, the worlds largest greenhouse gas emitter, will likely see a drop in carbon dioxide output this year, but its not clear whether this trend will continue. Like the US, China is experiencing growing energy demands from its tech sector, particularly from technologies like artificial intelligence.The next round of climate talks is scheduled for 2025 in Belm, Brazil, where countries are supposed to come to the table with even more ambitious goals for curbing their greenhouse gases. But setting even tougher targets doesnt mean much if countries are breaking their existing promises and emissions continue to rise. I had hoped for a more ambitious outcome on both finance and mitigation to meet the great challenge we face, said UN Secretary-General Antnio Guterres in a statement. I appeal to governments to see this agreement as a foundation and build on it.Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

On the Money is a monthly advice column. If you want advice on spending, saving, or investing or any of the complicated emotions that may come up as you prepare to make big financial decisions you can submit your question on this form. Here, we answer two questions asked by Vox readers, which have been edited and condensed.I have a personal adviser that I pay to manage my investment portfolio but Im not sure whether I should continue paying this adviser. My investments are with Vanguard because of its low ETF fees. I have a total of four ETFs: VTI, VXUS, BND and BNDX. These ETFs are spread out between three accounts. My wife and I each have a Roth IRA, and we also have a taxable brokerage account. Two of the ETFs are in each account. Should I continue paying my Vanguard advisor to manage this portfolio? Dear Advised,The portfolio your adviser created for you is extremely well balanced. Its also extremely diversified, in the sense that it includes an enormous variety of individual investments within four larger categories. You and your wife are currently invested in four exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that are designed to track broad segments of the market:VTI: the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETFVXUS: the Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETFBND: the Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund ETFBNDX: the Vanguard Total International Bond Index Fund ETFIn other words, you are invested in four ETFs that are made up of many, many smaller investments within the indices listed above total stock, total international stock, total bond, and total international bond. Since youre effectively invested in everything, your portfolio is likely to increase in value as long as the market itself doesnt crash. This kind of investment strategy is designed to get you through the ups and downs of the market without a lot of risk, especially because Im assuming your adviser is gradually adjusting the ratio of stocks to bonds as you and your wife approach retirement. Stocks offer greater growth potential than bonds but come with greater volatility, so a good investment adviser will slowly shift more of your investments over to bonds as you age. (Since bonds are less volatile, a bond-heavy portfolio should lose less of its value if the market drops before or during your retirement years.)That said, a target-date retirement fund does exactly the same thing, and you dont need to pay an adviser for that. Should you combine finances with your partner?How to cope with inflation and lifestyle creepHow are you supposed to start investing?Do you have questions related to personal finance? Submit them here.Vanguard personal advisers offer additional services beyond portfolio rebalancing, including guidance on how to withdraw money during retirement and strategies on how to manage the taxes associated with investments, so you may have the opportunity to get more out of your advisor than you would out of a target-date fund. Its also worth noting that your typical target-date retirement fund is likely to come with a higher expense ratio than a Vanguard ETF, costing you more money over time. VFIFX, for example, which is Vanguards target-date retirement fund for people planning to retire between 2048 and 2052, has an expense ratio of 0.08 percent. Your VTI ETF only has an expense ratio of 0.03 percent, which means that less of your money goes towards administering the fund.Im not suggesting that you drop your adviser and transfer all of your investments into a target-date retirement fund. Im not a professional investment advisor myself, which means I cannot provide specific investment advice plus, I have an extremely limited knowledge of your situation. However, I can suggest that you talk to your adviser about the full range of services they offer and ask yourself whether you are interested in taking advantage of those services.If you decide youd rather manage your investments on your own, you could always keep your current portfolio as-is and rebalance it yourself, adjusting the percentage of stocks to bonds every few years. If you are planning to retire in 2050, for example, you can take a look at Vanguards VFIFX glidepath and literally replicate it with your own ETFs. At age 40, for example, VFIFX puts roughly 55 percent of your investments in stocks, 35 percent in international stocks, 8 percent in bonds, and 2 percent in international bonds. By the time you reach age 65, VFIFX has adjusted your investments to include 30 percent stocks, 20 percent international stocks, 25 percent bonds, 15 percent international bonds, and the remaining 10 percent in short-term TIPS, which are inflation-protected securities.If that sounds too confusing, or if you arent sure whether you have enough time to schedule and track regular portfolio reallocations, you may want to just stick with your current adviser. Its also worth noting that a good investment adviser may be able to keep you from making impulsive decisions, such as selling during a temporary downturn and may also be able to advise you on other financial issues such as how much to withdraw during retirement. They may even be able to help you with estate planning, if thats important to you and your wife. Feel free to ask your advisor what you can expect over the next few decades, and use that response to help you decide whether or not to maintain the relationship.No matter what you decide to do next, your current portfolio puts you in a great place to get started.Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:

'Gotta unbox 'em all' it seems, as Pokemon grabs yet another world record, this time for a marathon 24 hour unboxing stream for its latest card game set, Surging Sparks

Call of Duty players will have to make two big purchases costing around 50 to get the latest version of the Replacer skin, and fans really aren't happy about it